The legal lunacy, promoted by such legal scholars as Howard Dean, and empowering the special snowflakes to leap out from behind rocks to engage in physical violence, isn’t new. America went through a similar escapade long ago when the sides were switched and the hated speech came from the dreaded commies.
In Douglas’s book, The Right of the People, he wrote, “In recent years, as we have denounced the loss of liberties abroad we have witnessed its decline here in America.”
On May 11, 1958, Mike Wallace interviewed Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, an icon of what was then the left, about free speech and civil liberties. Change commies for haters and it is as fresh and important today as it was then.
It’s like deja vu all over again, even if the SJWs think it’s totally new and different this time, when it’s their sad tears at stake.
Thanks to the Harry Ransom Center at UT-Austin, and Keith Kaplan for his help.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Basically the same pattern, ever since Salem.
Of the universe of analogies, not sure Salem is the right one here.
Basically the same pattern, ever since that episode of I Love Lucy where she was on the factory line stuffing chocolates into her mouth because she couldn’t keep up.
Better?
Still not doing it for me.
Maybe a shot of Vitameatavegamin, then?
Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
Normally I can’t stand French, but it sounds so nice this way you almost ignore the crushingly accurate cynicism.
The money quote at the end of the interview came from Douglas’ opinion in Termienello vs. City of Chicago:
” … a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea.”
It seems those who would silence speakers through heckler’s vetoes consider the mere utterance of disagreeable speech to be tantamount to a criminal assault or disorderly conduct.
God save this United States.
Hi SHG. The interview was fascinating. Thanks for sharing it. I enjoyed Justice Douglas’s plain way of speaking about these issues.
Justice Douglas focuses more on the state and even remarks that private entities can do whatever they like to suppress speech so long as they don’t employ an arm of the state to that end (~21:45). The rioters aren’t using the state. They are rioting because they know that the university won’t risk escalating the situation. That doesn’t look like state action. There haven’t been show trials or mass public arrests yet, have there?
There’s a social argument to be made for the free exchange of ideas, but the written constitution is working as designed still. The interview isn’t exactly relevant, but it is interesting from a historical perspective.
I appreciate that it’s hard to grasp how and why colleges that are funded with public monies are the state, and that most people lack the capacity to grasp legal concepts. Thinking is hard and can hurt people’s heads. I hope I didn’t cause you any permanent damage.
Antifa and the Universities(state) are in cahoots now? You should skip bingo tonight and start protesting yourself then. This is serious. I think there’s a place for you in front of the white house.
The second Spencer is arrested for trying to verbalize his nasty thoughts is the second I’ll join you. Until then, all you’re doing is shouting “fire.”
Oh dear. Not only did I cause you damage, but clearly it’s extensive and irreparable.
“But my mommy tells me I’m brilliant, you mean old poopyhead.”
That would be half right.
No, my mommy told me I don’t know anything. I think that’s why I keep coming back here. It’s just so familiar.
At least you have a sense of humor. You may turn okay with a bit of work.
Are you saying the “relevant” time to defend the constitution is to wait until it’s no longer “working as designed” because academics and folks like Howard Dean have successfully subverted it? That should work well.
Even if antifa weren’t functioning as a paramilitary arm of this academic movement, the debate is larger than just the riots.
He’s saying short of cops actually arresting people for speaking, the failure of publicly-funded colleges to protect invited campus speakers from violence is not really a First Amendment issue.
Douglas is a DOWG* imbued with privilege. How could any modern day liberal^^^^^^^progressive take him seriously?
*Dead Old White Guy
This was very cool, Keith. Well done.